NCLAT held that initiation of perjury proceedings requires prima...

NCLAT held that initiation of perjury proceedings requires prima facie proof of a deliberate falsehood on a matter of substance, supported by distinct evidence and not mere suspicion. The resolution professional's reply affidavit, filed in defence of the CIRP steps and in response to an attempt to reopen the approved plan, did not disclose mala fides or any deceptive statement amounting to perjury, so rejection of that application was upheld. It also affirmed that an approved resolution plan under the IBC is binding on all stakeholders, and that belated attempts to unsettle an unchallenged, implemented plan were frivolous, justifying costs for abuse of process.